And you are living proof that one should stick to his own level of incompetence and not branch out into other areas. People that work on LNG ships regularly refer to them as “ball ships”…maybe perhaps because they have a few bigass ball (another word for sphere) shaped tanks
In fact they have probably never heard the expressing “ball ship”
The majority of the LNG Carriers in the world today, both presently trading and new order are membrane type. GTT’s Membrane containment system is dominating the market at the moment: https://gtt.fr/technologies
Yes, the term “ball ship” is used by those that work on membrane type LNG vessels when referring to Moss Rosenberg Spherical type LNG carrier. Doesn’t that roll of the tongue very well, “Moss Rosenberg Spherical type LNG carrier”?
I think saying “ball ship” is easier and faster. And so do the officers of various nationalities that I’ve heard use the term…all whom were working on a Mk3 membrane type LNG ship.
Pretty presumptuous there, eh? As stated, it appears you can’t read between the lines and haven’t worked LNG…because if you did you wouldn’t make such assertions. But for giggles, asked a few officers of varying nationalities if they knew what a “ball ship” was, and they all did. Ball ship is an alternative, possibly slang, term to call Moss Rosenberg Spherical type LNG ship.
Why don’t you just fill up the gap between the lines? (Just curious)
Unless it is classified “Top Secret”, whatever you are up to on your LNG ship adventures, with “balls”, or otherwise. (the ships I mean)
No, just stating the obvious. If you had, you would speak as a professional would. I have friends and acquittances who worked on the Exmar ships, the Energy Transport and Kuwaiti (LPG) Tankers. I worked for the person in charge of building the Energy Transport Tankers. When I was involved with ship construction at HMD in Korea I worked alongside another site team who were building a LNG tanker at HHI and have since built another. For a time, I was part of a steam to LNG-diesel repowering project. At no time did the term “ball ship” ever come up or was used when LNG ships were discussed.
Yes, it was pretty clear what ships you were trying to refer to. I would not be surprised if you came up with that description in hopes others might believe you know more than you really do. If you wish to use that as a slang term, (as you put it) that is up to you. It’s like a non-mariner in a group of mariners referring to a line as a “rope”.
OK boomer. This thread isn’t about me. And it most definitely isn’t about you or all the super smart LNG friends you have that never used a slang term…guess ya’ll are just super high brow with 100% formal speaking.
Why did I call it a ball ship? Because other people reading this thread that don’t have your super duper level of expertness would easily understand what a “ball ship” is. Because it has big fucking balls on it for tanks. You, instead, love to be quite the snob and must use esoteric jargon to hoist yourself high upon your pedestal.
Since you are so in the know, did Pasha finish the steam to diesel/lng conversion that was supposed to be done in China (last I heard)? And of course you know that Exmar isn’t running the fleet of LNG that it used to. What’s the gossip on China building LNG ships…and the massive amount of LNG ships on the order books? Will these new builds crash future charter rates?
PS: I’ve been in multiple LNG related classes, and an alternative name the instructors used to “Moss Ships” was ball ships. And the balls were made in South Carolina, the ship via barge. Quite some big balls.
Last I heard the George ll (ex-Reliance) will come out in April. I’ve seen some pictures of her.
Funny, I had the exact same conversation with the group building their LNG Tanker in Korea, and that was awhile back. A lot has to do with the number of terminals supplying the gas keeping up with the number of terminals wanting to receive it, IMO.